https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77708
Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2016-09-23
CC| |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Component|c |middle-end
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |msebor at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The warning is by design here but I will confirm the report as a request for
change.
I agree that, especially when the snprintf return value is used, warning at the
default level may not be helpful. I'm not sure if a warning should be issued
at a higher level, not at all, or under a separate option. I'd like to get the
input from others before making a change.
I'm not sure that suppressing the warning at level 1 when the snprintf return
value isn't used is a good idea. Such calls typically assume that the output
will not be truncated and subsequent code isn't prepared to handle it. I fixed
a few such cases in GCC when testing the warning.
